[BigDaddy]

I apologize for posting 3 time in a row, but I think I may need to expound on statistics and randomness, since it seems the topic may be misunderstood. Indeed parts of statistics are still theoretical, and it took until the middle ages before statistics was really a science.

First, remember that BEFORE you run a test you can estimate the probabilities of something happening, like 2 blood paths in a row (.125^2=1.54% chance), BUT in a random system the previous result does not effect the next result. So, after you recruit and get a blood path, the probability of the next recruit being a blood path is still 1/8. This is what makes next round projections impossible in a random system, and is why you need patterns to prove your hypothesis.

Also, it appears that significance is misunderstood. So:

Statistical Significance-the probability (P) that a sample (s) is representative of the population (S).

More simply the probability that the mages you hired are representative of all the mages that have been and ever will be recruited.

While demonstrating why large numbers of samples (recruits) are necessary is more difficult, a simple example can show why just a few recruits is not enough is quite simple.

So, if you hire just 1 mage, and assume it is representative of the population you'll get a result of 100% of mages belong to 1 path. Similarly if you hire just 8, and don't get mages of 2 paths, you could conclude that some paths recieve 0% of random picks. In a random system the likelyhood of these results declines with sample size (the number of mages recruited). In conclusion, simply take our word for it that you NEED to recruit many mages to draw any conclusions. Significance (alpha) can be found given population constraints (even for infinite populations), however, I've misplaced my book. I am quite experienced (and educated) in statistics and trust me that you do not need 10000 or even 1000 recruits to test a sytem with 7 degrees of freedom, 300-400 will be just fine.

I sincerely hope this helps.